2011/10/14 Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com:
花儿对我笑 870523...@qq.com writes:
Please see the whole E-mail Please send a GCC
for windows. Language:Chinese or English. I'm a Chinese student,now
I'm studing C++.I want a GCC(For Windows,Chinese),but my English
Right and as Richard said I can munge the modes during expansion of
existing builtins when needed.
OK, but you precisely shouldn't need to do it since the type is fixed.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
Or I am missing someting?
I often see the x86 vectorizer with -mtune=generic generate a lot of
complicated code just to adjust for potential misalignment.
My thought was just if the alias oracle knows what the original
Can I submit a patch for it? Or is it a small thing that patch is not necessary?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:38 AM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'
Subject: Re: Question about
I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation, which requires veneer. It was suggested that
the code most likely to produce this relocation would involve some sort
of tail recursion. I
Recently I've been taking a foray into the ARM ABI to port the Glasgow
Haskell Compiler's internal linker to ARM. One question I've run into is
how to handle the case of interworking with R_ARM_JUMP24. This
particular relocation could be generated often by GHC as a result of
tail call
On 14/10/11 17:40, Ben Gamari wrote:
According to the ELF for ARM specification, this case requires the
generation of veneer code to handle the instruction set switch. My
question is where can one reliably place this veneer such that it is
within the 2^11 window permitted by the relevant
On 14/10/11 17:40, Ben Gamari wrote:
I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation, which requires veneer. It was suggested that
the code most likely to produce this relocation would
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:38:26 +0100, Richard Earnshaw rearn...@arm.com wrote:
On 14/10/11 17:40, Ben Gamari wrote:
I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation, which requires
Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com writes:
Can I submit a patch for it? Or is it a small thing that patch is not
necessary?
I will preapprove such a patch for anybody with commit access.
Ian
-Original Message-
From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
Sent: Friday,
Attached, please find a patch fixing this issue.
2011-10-14 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
* varasm.c (default_elf_asm_named_section): Removed ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED
tag
before decl.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20111014 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20111014/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #34 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-10-14
07:54:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 25494
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25494
backported fragment of r171341, fixes insv on m68k
With this patch, a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #35 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-10-14
07:57:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #34)
Created attachment 25494 [details]
backported fragment of r171341, fixes insv on m68k
With this patch, a trivial forward-port
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50699
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14 08:13:12
UTC ---
Author: iains
Date: Fri Oct 14 08:13:04 2011
New Revision: 179962
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179962
Log:
gcc:
PR bootstrap/50699
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50699
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48835
--- Comment #36 from Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd dot org 2011-10-14 08:39:06
UTC ---
With this patch, a trivial forward-port of the gcc-4.5.3 Ada/m68k patch, and a
…
r178834) I was finally able to successfully bootstrap Ada on m68k-linux.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
08:51:08 UTC ---
I wonder if another alternative would have been, also for better error
reporting to the user, to do sth like
explicit
codecvt(size_t __refs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17212
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-14 09:14:31 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Oct 14 09:14:26 2011
New Revision: 179963
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179963
Log:
/gcc
2011-10-14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50723
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17212
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-14 09:15:02 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Oct 14 09:14:58 2011
New Revision: 179964
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179964
Log:
/gcc
2011-10-14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17212
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50723
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50717
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50716
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50723
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.0 |4.6.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-14
09:44:05 UTC ---
Note that a codecvt constructor taking (__c_local, size_t) isn't Standard, we
don't want it in the primary. If you ask me, not having written this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50726
Bug #: 50726
Summary: Internal compiler error when specializing template
with an Enum Class
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50726
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50714
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
10:14:10 UTC ---
The testcase is invalid, std types can only be specialized for user-defined
types. It can be made valid by:
#include ext/pod_char_traits.h
#define mychar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50723
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
11:03:11 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Oct 14 11:03:06 2011
New Revision: 179967
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179967
Log:
2011-10-14 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50716
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50716
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
12:10:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
It's because we do
align = MAX (TYPE_ALIGN (TREE_TYPE (exp)), get_object_alignment
(exp));
which discards the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49242
--- Comment #4 from Michael Richmond michael.a.richmond at nasa dot gov
2011-10-14 12:13:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
May be related to bug 50709.
Michael, did you use --disable-checking configure option?
I used
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50723
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
12:17:49 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Oct 14 12:17:41 2011
New Revision: 179974
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179974
Log:
2011-10-14 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50712
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
12:17:49 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Oct 14 12:17:41 2011
New Revision: 179974
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179974
Log:
2011-10-14 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50727
Bug #: 50727
Summary: ICE with segfault in flow_bb_inside_loop_p
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50723
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50727
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-none-eabi |arm-*-*,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50728
Bug #: 50728
Summary: Inefficient vector loads from aggregates passed by
value
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
12:38:20 UTC ---
I split out the inefficient by-value passing thing to PR50728
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50689
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
12:50:54 UTC ---
Thanks. I am testing the following patch. Could you, please, verify that it
soves the problem on AIX? I am quite convinced the aliases should be output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
2011-10-14 12:54:46 UTC ---
thanks for the splitting: it is indeed the most serious problem.
what about complex ops in scalar code? keep it here and shall I spawn a
specific
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36659
Don donmgeso at hotmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||donmgeso at hotmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50728
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
13:10:06 UTC ---
Other testcase:
typedef float Value;
struct A {
Value a[16 / sizeof (Value)];
} __attribute__ ((aligned(16)));
Value get(A a)
{
return a.a[0];
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36659
--- Comment #4 from Don donmgeso at hotmail dot com 2011-10-14 13:11:09 UTC
---
Found this bug while trying to compile Spidermonkey 1.85 with gcc 4.6 (g++).
nanojit.h:183:26: error: 'isS32' declared as an 'inline' variable. The code
is:
static
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36659
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
13:14:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Is there a fix for this or is this version flawed? Can we be certain this bug
will be fixed by the next release? This is a basic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
13:23:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
thanks for the splitting: it is indeed the most serious problem.
what about complex ops in scalar code? keep it here and shall
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50721
--- Comment #8 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
13:23:58 UTC ---
It looks like gsl_poly_dd_taylor overwrites part of the caller's stack frame.
Specifically, this statement
w[size - 1] = 1.0;
appears to go out of bounds.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50721
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
13:29:35 UTC ---
Hmm, even without understanding Fortran it looks like
real(fgsl_double) :: ra, xa(10), ya(10), da(10), di(10), d(2)
declares d as a 2 element array, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|build with |bootstrap fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50719
Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50729
Bug #: 50729
Summary: Silent code gen fault: Value range propagation seems
to propagate values across narrowing/widening
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50721
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50728
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
13:40:31 UTC ---
typedef __complex__ float Value;
struct A {
Value a[16 / sizeof (Value)];
} __attribute__ ((aligned(16)));
Value get(A a)
{
return a.a[0];
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50729
--- Comment #1 from Matthew Gretton-Dann mgretton at sourceware dot org
2011-10-14 13:40:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 25498
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25498
Cutdown pre-processed non-executable testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50729
--- Comment #2 from Matthew Gretton-Dann mgretton at sourceware dot org
2011-10-14 13:49:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 25499
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25499
Tree just before VRP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50729
--- Comment #3 from Matthew Gretton-Dann mgretton at sourceware dot org
2011-10-14 13:49:50 UTC ---
Created attachment 25500
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25500
VRP1 Analysis and resultant tree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50730
Bug #: 50730
Summary: SLP vectorization confused by unrelated DRs
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50721
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-10-14 13:58:21 UTC ---
Well, in this example size is 3, hence, w[size -1] == w[2]. In Fortran, the
w is the last argument, which is 2 and thus d(2) == d(1:2) has two
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50729
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36659
--- Comment #6 from Don donmgeso at hotmail dot com 2011-10-14 14:13:59 UTC
---
Yeah.., soon realized that after looking into it. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
Ethan Tira-Thompson ejtttje at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48126
--- Comment #10 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-14 14:38:48 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Oct 14 14:38:42 2011
New Revision: 179980
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179980
Log:
gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38174
--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-14 14:43:06 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Oct 14 14:43:03 2011
New Revision: 179984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179984
Log:
/cp
2011-10-14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38174
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48126
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
14:47:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
if they are testing for 'bad' values (e.g. isnan), that's probably significant
-- otherwise the user wouldn't have added the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-14
14:56:27 UTC ---
I haven't really followed this discussion, but I remember a very similar one
some time ago, and I suspect that part of the confusion stems from the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|bootstrap fails with error |bootstrap fails
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-14
15:07:40 UTC ---
I was also thinking, maybe from the user point of view, a good way to deal with
this kind of problem today is splitting the computation in parts via the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50718
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
15:09:25 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Oct 14 15:09:21 2011
New Revision: 179988
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179988
Log:
2011-10-14 Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50719
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-10-14 15:16:02 UTC ---
--- Comment #1 from Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com 2011-10-14
13:31:13 UTC ---
Rainer, any ideas?
Not without
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50717
Andrew Stubbs ams at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-10-14
15:32:24 UTC ---
By the way, a couple of weeks ago I'm pretty sure to have read mentioned a
small glitch in the linker script, revealed by a warning which doesn't show
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50704
--- Comment #9 from Artem Shinkarov tema at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
15:39:56 UTC ---
The problem should be fixed with 179991. Anyone running 32-bit architectures,
please confirm.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46278
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
15:42:40 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Fri Oct 14 15:42:33 2011
New Revision: 179993
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=179993
Log:
PR target/46278
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i386-pc-solaris2.10 |*-*-solaris2*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
--- Comment #2 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 16:01:26 UTC ---
following passes were enabled. i think if the following result of -fdump-passes
aren't same for the result of -m32, the wrong generated one wouldn't come out.
$ gcc -O3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50715
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-10-14 16:02:16 UTC ---
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2011-10-14 15:32:24 UTC ---
By the way, a couple of weeks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50724
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-14
16:03:06 UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25975
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28795
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28796
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50696
Paolo Bonzini bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bonzini at gnu dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
--- Comment #3 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 16:26:15 UTC ---
generated prologue with pseudo-reloc.ii (wrong one)
;;
;; Full RTL generated for this function:
;;
(note 8 0 11 NOTE_INSN_DELETED)
(note 11 8 459 2 [bb 2]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50705
--- Comment #9 from SK santoshkumar.a at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 16:26:38
UTC ---
Below is another scenario::
test_bit called with args
PG_slab = 7;
page-flags = 0xc0;
test_bit(PG_slab, page-flags) returns value 0. This is used by PageSlab in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
--- Comment #4 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 16:27:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 25501
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25501
reduced source code but generates correct prologue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
--- Comment #5 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 16:29:56 UTC ---
by comparing the result of -fdump-passes between pseudo-reloc.ii and r.c,
--- r.c.pass
+++ pseudo-reloc.pass
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
tree-mudflap1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49740
Douglas Mencken dougmencken at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50696
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
--- Comment #6 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 16:38:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Sorry. this comment is obsolete.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50731
Bug #: 50731
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/vector-shift2.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50731
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 16:42:37
UTC ---
Revision 179952 is OK.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
gee jojelino at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25501|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50725
--- Comment #8 from gee jojelino at gmail dot com 2011-10-14 17:00:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 25503
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25503
generated rtl with pseudo-reloc.ii
1 - 100 of 248 matches
Mail list logo
